list_video_translations

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does it well: it discloses the 15-day retention window, the intentional absence of download links, the payload-size rationale, and the fact that even if links existed they could expire. It does not explicitly say the operation is read-only or describe pagination defaults, but the key non-obvious behaviors are covered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, status mapping, no-download-links rationale, and the alternative routing are all stated compactly. The most important scoping constraints are front-loaded, and the explanation of why links are omitted is concise and not redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential return semantics: what the list is for, what it returns at a high level, what it intentionally omits, and the time window. It does not describe pagination response structure or default page sizes, but those are secondary for a list explicitly meant for status lookup.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds considerable meaning for the status parameter by enumerating all filter values (0-4), and it explains that the response is meant to expose order numbers and statuses. It does not add much for page_num/page_size, but the status semantics alone justify above baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('分页查询视频翻译任务列表'), defines the scope (recent 15 days), and explicitly clarifies the list's purpose: find order numbers and check status. It also differentiates itself from get_video_translation_status by directing delivery use cases there.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: this list is only for finding order numbers and viewing status, not for fetching download links. It names the alternative tool to use for deliverables and tells the agent to pass videoTranslateOrderNo to get_video_translation_status.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.